[email protected] Providing Details, and We Will Remove Access to the Work Immediately and Investigate Your Claim
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Roskilde University Co-creation as a new form of citizen engagement Comparing Danish and Dutch experiences at the local government level Torfing, Jacob; Siebers, Vinitha Published in: International Public Management Review Publication date: 2018 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (APA): Torfing, J., & Siebers, V. (2018). Co-creation as a new form of citizen engagement: Comparing Danish and Dutch experiences at the local government level. International Public Management Review, 18(2), 187-208. http://journals.sfu.ca/ipmr/index.php/ipmr/article/download/335/297 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain. • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 24. Sep. 2021 CO-CREATION AS A NEW FORM OF CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT: COMPARING DANISH AND DUTCH EXPERIENCES AT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEVEL Vinitha Siebers and Jacob Torfing ABSTRACT Citizen engagement is a key component of modern liberal democracy, especially at the local level, it is an important tool for generating political input, securing political sup- port, mobilizing societal resources and finding creative solutions to the problems and challenges that governments face. Currently, we are witnessing an interesting shift in citizen engagement towards viewing citizens as co-creators of local governance, thus recognizing that citizens have both knowledge and resources that may help tackling wicked and unruly problems. Local governments increasingly focus on the design of co- creation processes and search for ways to support and enhance this new form of citizen engagement. To explore how processes of co-creation unfold at the level of local gov- ernment, this article analyzes and compares a Danish and Dutch case of co-creation with local citizens. The comparative case study identifies the different reasons for initi- ating co-creation. It analyses the processes and outcomes of co-creation and reflects on the role of institutional design and leadership. The conclusion is that co-creation can be a viable strategy in very different situations if supported by the right design and leader- ship. Keywords - Citizen Engagement, Co-creation, Leadership, Local Government, Govern- ance. INTRODUCTION Citizen engagement is a central feature of modern liberal democracy, and from the late 1960s onwards, it has become a central theme within both national and local govern- ments (Held, 1987; Irvin & Stansbury, 2004). It is generally held that citizen engage- ment enhances the quality of democracy and is valuable for generating political input, mobilizing societal resources and enhancing support to new solutions (Irvin & Stansbu- ry, 2004; Horlick-Jones, Rowe & Walls, 2007; Nabatchi & Leighninger, 2015). Cur- rently, an important shift in citizen engagement is under way (Rose, 2002). As such, we are moving from a representative democracy, in which citizens are primarily seen as voters and occasionally invited to hearings orchestrated by government officials, to a Copyright: © 2018 Siebers and Torfing. Copyright for this article is retained by the authors, with first publication rights granted to the International Public Management Review (IPMR). All journal content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. By virtue of their appearance in this open-access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial set- tings. Corresponding Author: [email protected] International Public Management Review Vol. 18, Iss. 2, 2018 IPMR www.ipmr.net 187 Co-creation as new form of Citizen Engagement more interactive democracy, in which citizens are involved more actively and directly in co-creating solutions to hard-to-solve problems (Gaventa, 2002; Roberts, 2004; Reddel &Woolcock, 2004; Sørensen &Torfing, 2016). Local authorities realize that citizens not only have a voice that should be heard through elections and consultations, but also have knowledge, resources and ideas that can be mobilized in the attempt to tackle soci- etal problems and challenges. Citizens are increasingly viewed as co-creators of public governance, and invited to participate in defining the problems at hand and designing and implementing new and bold solutions (Andrew & Goldsmith, 1998; Gaventa, 2002; Roberts, 2004; Torfing, Sørensen, and Røiseland, 2016). Consequently, local municipal- ities search for new ways to engage citizens in processes of co-creation and new ways to support these processes through institutional design and leadership. Based on the observation that citizen engagement is changing towards a greater emphasis on co-creation this paper investigates the underlying rationale of co-creation, its empirical manifestation, and the attempt to support it through new forms of institu- tional design and leadership. The key argument however, is that co-creation is not only used to develop new and creative solutions in situations where there are plenty of re- sources, but may also be a viable strategy for making difficult choices and prioritiza- tions in situations with severe fiscal constraints. The article begins by describing the changing view of citizen engagement at the level of local government. It then introduces and analyses two cases of co-creation and compares them in terms of processes, institutional designs and forms of leadership. The discussion reflects on the viability of co-creation as a strategy for local governments facing different kinds of challenges and explores how co-creation may be supported and enhanced by meta-governance (Sørensen &Torfing, 2009). New forms of citizen engagement: From voter to co-creator The core idea of democracy is that citizens should be able to influence the decisions of government officials. However, the way that citizens engage in democratic decision- making is constantly changing. The educational revolution and anti-authoritarian revo- lution from the 1960s onwards have triggered several transformations in the perception of how citizens can and should engage in public governance (Warren, 2002). As a re- sult, the traditional forms of citizen engagement have been complemented with new forms of engagement (Nabatchi & Leighninger, 2015). The shifting ideas about citizen engagement can be envisaged by comparing four different paradigms that differ in terms of the basic rationale for citizen engagement, the role of citizens, the institutional design of citizen engagement and the kind of public leadership demanded. Table 1 compares the four paradigms for citizen engagement. Table 1: Comparison of four different paradigms for citizen engagement* Representative Participatory de- New Public Man- Co-creation (2010-) democracy (-1960) mocracy (1960- agement (1980- 1980)s 2010) The basic Citizens should be Intensely affected The public sector Citizens can help to rationale able to control citizens should have should be more solve wicked and government an additional chan- responsive to the unruly problems nel of influence preferences of the citizens International Public Management Review Vol. 18, Iss. 2, 2018 IPMR www.ipmr.net 188 Vinitha Siebers and Jacob Torfing Role of the Citizens are voters Citizens are affected Citizens are cus- Citizens are compe- citizen with opinions that stakeholders that tomers with indi- tent and resourceful they express in free have interests that vidual needs and actors with both a and open elections they should be al- requirements that right and obligation lowed to pursue should influence to participate in pub- service delivery lic governance on the basis of an active citizenship Institutional Regular elections Hearings organized Free choice of pub- Creation of arenas for design based on one man, either as city hall lic or private ser- networked interaction one vote meetings or on-line vice provider with- based on sustained consultations in quasi-markets dialogue Leadership Political parties Public officials Politicians and Network management offer competing organize participa- public managers aiming to bring actors programs to attract tory processes and define minimum together, facilitate voters listen to stakehold- service standards in interaction and stimu- ers before making quasi-markets and late innovative prob- final decisions monitor results lem-solving *Table 1 is based on Lowndes et al., 2001; Fung, 2007; Smith, 2008; Nabatchi & Leighninger, 2015 and Sørensen & Torfing, 2016. Before describing the four paradigms, let us first explain what we mean by the basic rationale, the role of the citizen, the institutional design and the form of public leader- ship. There are shifting political-democratic rationales that seek to motivate and justify why citizens should somehow engage in democratic governance. The different ration- ales refer to different